Chapter Eight: That's a Wrap! (Pun Intended)

Conclusion

If there is one thing I want readers to take away from the series of blog posting, it's this: 

be critical, be skeptical, be analytical. 

When it comes to scientific literature, the only "mortal sin" is to blindly believe what you are told or what you read. The scientific field is built on a foundation of hard, observable, and reproducible findings. Even in the top-notch scientific peer reviewed journals, research articles can still be published that are not very reliable nor valid. Even when looking for information in reliable journals, always be skeptical of the methods, results, and more importantly, the conclusions drawn by the author. Moreover, if at all possible, avoid media sources that are mainstream and for the most part biased. While it can be difficult to read scientific literature, it's the only way of attaining the real evidence that currently exists. This is also a calling to all future scientists: be the future generation that makes scientific knowledge readily accessible and understandable to the general public. The effects of this are unprecedented; it would be doing the entire world justice and would serve to promote the better good of mankind.

I hope that through the series of postings in my blog, I was able to practice what I am preaching and demonstrate the importance of researching topics. More importantly, understanding a topic allows for you to be an active (and knowledgable!) member in the ever-developing debates in the science world.

Using marijuana and its medicinal value as an example, I hope to shed light on the myths and misconceptions on marijuana use while simultaneously introducing the current state of research. Marijuana is an excellent example of how the zeitgeist (leading schools of thought of a time period that provides context of scientific knowledge) inevitably and irrevocably influence the way society views scientific matters. Marijuana use went from the worst among all illicit drugs to a hopeful potential treatment for many people who suffer from an array of ailments. Now, with the election going on and the midterm coming up, the United States is at the brink of changing how society views marijuana, and moreover, marijuana users.

However, while marijuana has potential, don't forget to be analytical. Will it be readily accepted? What progress does society and science have to make in order for it to be a treatment? What opposition does the marijuana movement face? What evidence do the advocates have to stand behind their claims? What about the opponents?

While still in the early years of research, medical marijuana has years of research left until it can be integrated into western medical practices. Although the process is long, it is a necessary one: the safety and efficacy of drugs used to treat diseases is the utmost important aspect of therapeutic drugs.

Overall, I hope if anything the readers of this blog will be able to say they learned something after reading my posts. Whether it be a new opinion on marijuana or simply looking at both sides of the same coin, I hope I did science justice and provided reliable and valid information.

Thank You.

Chapter Seven: Marijuana Legalization Polls

Oregon, Alaska, D.C Next to Vote on Legal Marijuana

Recently I came across an article from yahoo.com that came from "Constitution Daily" from the National Constitution Center. This article discussed the upcoming polls in Oregon, Alaska, and District of Columbia (D.C) and in particular focused on the topic of marijuana legalization.

In early November, voters in the three aforementioned states will be able to decide on the legal status of marijuana as they did in Colorado and Washington back during the election of 2012. The status of marijuana in these two states are constantly developing even to this day. Originally, the states allowed recreational marijuana sales and use, and now officials have approved a tax and distribution infrastructure. Despite these state laws conflicting with federal regulation, the Justice Department will not criminally prosecute recreational marijuana users and state-approved growers and vendors in the states in which the recreational sale and use of marijuana is legal.

An issue arises with the District of Columbia. When it was originally founded from land owned by Maryland and Virginia, it was intended to act as a safe and secure district; it was made clear that the District of Columbia was not a state. This makes the legalization process different than other states and there may be resistance in the legalization of marijuana. In the case of Oregon and Alaska, the November 4th ballot allows for possession, growth of limited plants, and sale of limited amounts of marijuana for personal use. In D.C. however, the sale of marijuana would not be legalized. The aspect that all these will have in common? A state tax on the cultivation and sale of marijuana.

Critique of Mainstream Media

Politically speaking, I had to educate myself as I lacked sufficient knowledge in the subject to truly be able to critically analyze any article on the political aspect of marijuana. Although this article lacked any sort of scientific knowledge, it still served it's purpose; to shed light on the current political tides and the changes that may soon take place in early November. This article was a sort of snap-shot of the upcoming political events that could drastically effect marijuana's status in 3 states. 

I think within a week the marijuana movement can either be fueled even further, or the movement could come to a sudden halt. If the states were to pass the laws, it would be incentive for other states to continue with the "trend" (for a lack of better term) and may be the first of many changing state policies. It can further build upon the changes that Colorado and Washington have caused across the nation and will make 2016 one of the most important years for marijuana and its legalization. On the other hand, if the state voters choose to not pass the changes, then the momentum that had built up in the marijuana movement would possibly come to a sudden halt.

I enjoyed the fact that it put into perspective the different legalization measures that the polls would use. While all the poll questions are relatively similar, they each have nuances that make them subtly different. For example, D.C. polls aren't considering the legalization of the sale of marijuana. Oregon allows for possession of 8 ounces and 4 plants of marijuana, while Alaska allows for possession of 1 ounce and 6 plants of marijuana. It's interesting to see how each state has their own differences when it comes to the cultivation, possession, sale, and use of marijuana yet they all make it legal (with the exception of D.C.). This coming week, in my opinion, will mark either a revolution in marijuana status in the United States or will completely cease the momentum built up by marijuana activists. 

References

• http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2014/10/oregon-alaska-d-c-next-to-vote-on-legal-marijuana/

Image Source

• http://www.eastbayri.com/tag/election-2014/

Chapter Six: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Frequently Asked Questions

• What is marijuana?
• Marijuana is the flower portion of the female cannabis plant that exists it three distinctive subtypes, based on their primary effects. The subtypes are cannabis sativa, cannabis indica, and cannabis ruteralis.
• What is THC?
• Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary psychoactive agent in marijuana. THC belongs to a family of cannabinoids, which resembles molecules synthesized naturally in the body. It functions primarily by indirectly increasing levels of dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with the reward and pleasure pathway in the brain. 
• What are the effects of marijuana?
• Euphoria, increase in appetite, decrease in short term memory, dry mouth, reddening of eyes, impaired motor skills, coordination, and concentration, relaxed state of muscles, increased heart rate, lowered blood pressure, and possibly paranoia and anxiety.
• What are the forms of marijuana?
• Marijuana comes in many forms, such as the normal dried flower form, as kief (powder),  as hashish (resin-like substance), hash oil (solvent extraction), as an infusion (oil containing THC), and as a tincture (extraction in alcoholic substance).
• How is marijuana consumed?
• Marijuana can be smoked using rolling papers or a water pipe, it can be inhaled as vapor by heating the plant, it can be eaten as an edible (food made with oil containing THC), or it can be ingested as a tea.
• What are different uses of marijuana?
• Marijuana is used recreationally (3rd most popular drug after tobacco and alcohol), is used medically to treat certain ailments, and it is used industrially in the manufacturing of textiles, paper, paints, clothing, plastics, and cosmetics. 
• Where is marijuana legal?
• Marijuana is legal medicinally in 21 states, and legal recreationally in only two states (Colorado and Washington). 
• Is marijuana a gateway drug?
• Evidence shows that marijuana is not a gateway drug and may even serve as an "exit" drug in which people withdrawing from hard drugs (heroine, cocaine) use marijuana to alleviate symptoms associated with withdrawal. More over, as the number of hard drugs declines, the number of marijuana users increases.
• Is marijuana addictive?
• Physically, marijuana is not addictive. However, some evidence suggests that any dependence is psychological in nature. Only 9% of users become addicted, a percentage lower than alcohol, tobacco, and even caffeine. 
• Is marijuana dangerous or unhealthy?
• Marijuana is safer than most common drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco. Alcohol is closely linked to higher risk motor vehicle accidents, and smoking cigarettes has been found to be causative of lung cancer. There have been no long term effects on the brain or on the lungs, and has even been shown to induce many health benefits.
• Can marijuana kill you?
• Not one person has died by overdosing on marijuana. It would take 40,000 times the normal amount of THC to kill you, meaning smoking 800 joints in one sitting! In reality, if you did overdose, it would be due to the carbon monoxide poisoning, not the THC.

Any questions you have I didn't answer? Let me know! I will do my best to get back to you individually or perhaps add it to this list.

References

1. http://norml.org/aboutmarijuana/item/good-plant?category_id=730
2. http://norml.org/aboutmarijuana/item/violent-acts?category_id=730
3. http://www.drugpolicy.org/drug-facts/10-facts-about-marijuana
4. http://www.weather.com/health/shocking-things-you-dont-know-about-weed-20140407?pageno=1
5. http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-medical-marijuana/2013/10/5-amazing-things-you-didnt-know-about-marijuana/
6. http://www.theweedblog.com/42-0-facts-about-marijuana-and-why-it-should-be-legal/
7. http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana
8. Mahmoud A. ElSohly (2007). Marijuana and the Cannabinoids. Springer. p. 8. ISBN 978-1-59259-947-9.
9. Ethan B Russo (2013). Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic Potential. Routledge. p. 28. ISBN 978-1-136-61493-4.
10. UNODC. World Drug Report 2010. United Nations Publication. p. 198. Retrieved 2010-07-19.
11.  Mitch Earleywine (2002). Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence. Oxford University Press. p. 24. ISBN 978-0-19-513893-1.
12. Leslie L. Iversen (2000). The Science of Marijuana. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-515110-7.
13.  Castle/Murray/D'Souza (2004). Marijuana and Madness. Cambridge University Press. p. 35. ISBN 879-1-139-50267-2.
14. J. E. Joy, S. J. Watson, Jr., and J. A. Benson, Jr. (1999). Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. Washington, D.C. National Academy of Sciences Press. ISBN 0-585-05800-8.
15. http://www.drugs.com/illicit/marijuana.html
16. http://norml.org/marijuana
17. http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana

Chapter Five: Myths and Misconceptions

Myths and Misconceptions

We'll begin this discussion by identifying a few common ideas and thoughts about marijuana and marijuana users, then analyze the evidence that supports (or argues against) the belief. 

1. Marijuana is a gateway drug
2. Marijuana is addictive and dependence is increasing
3. Marijuana is as harmful as tobacco and alcohol
4. Marijuana use is correlated with mental health disorders and decrease in cognitive abilities
5. Marijuana can kill you by overdose
6. Marijuana is becoming stronger and more potent
7. Marijuana is correlated with crime and aggression
8. Marijuana makes you an unsafe driver

Marijuana is a gateway drug

The number of hard drug users are going down, while marijuana user numbers are going up. Studies show that 75% of all Americans who use marijuana have never used hard drugs such as cocaine and heroine. Interestingly, those who started drinking alcohol were more likely to partake in hard-drug use. New evidence suggests that marijuana can function as an "exit drug" by helping people reduce or eliminate their use of more harmful drugs by easing withdrawal symptoms. 

Marijuana is addictive and dependence is increasing

Research show that only 9% of users become addicted to marijuana, more than any other illicit drug (even caffeine!). Moreover, marijuana does not cause physical dependence. Any dependence is psychologically constructed. It is possible to experience mild withdrawal symptoms, but unlike withdrawal from alcohol, it cannot kill you. Surveys have demonstrated that most of those who have smoked marijuana in the past do not become regular users. Rates of marijuana dependence have not increased over the past 10 years.

Marijuana is as harmful as tobacco and alcohol

Marijuana is in fact safer than tobacco and alcohol. Not only has no one directly died as a result of marijuana use, but alcohol use is one of the leading causes of motor vehicle accidents and can lead to death by poisoning. Smoking cigarettes has been directly correlated to lung cancer, but smoking marijuana has not been proven to have any detrimental effects on the lungs. The annual death rate of marijuana is zero, and is actually lessening the number of people who use tobacco and alcohol. 

Marijuana use is correlated with mental health disorders and decrease in cognitive abilities

No harm from marijuana has been found on the brain, even from long term high-dose use. In fact, some studies suggest that marijuana can help in neurogenesis, the creation of new neurons in the brain. Researchers have found no evidence of brain abnormalities in monkeys who inhaled 4-5 marijuana cigarettes every day for a year. Marijuana does not kill brain cells. Some studies have shown decreased IQ in adulthood when individuals begin smoking as a teenager, but the effects were not found when an individual begins smoking as an adult. While smoking causes a temporary short-term memory deficit, people are still able to recall information they have already learned. 

Some studies have shown that there is a link between marijuana use and mental illness, but there is a lack of compelling evidence to support such claims that marijuana is a causal risk factor in the development of psychiatric disorders. Most tellingly, population rates of schizophrenia and other psychiatric illnesses have remained flat even when marijuana user rates have increased. Emerging evidence indicates it may alleviate psychiatric symptoms, and may have an anti-psychotic property. 

Marijuana can kill you by overdose

There has yet to be one documented case of overdosing on marijuana. Animal test shave shown that extremely high doses of marijuana is needed to have a lethal effect. You would need to consumer 40,000 times the normal dose (or 800 joints) of marijuana in one sitting to have a severe effect.  In fact, if you did manage to overdose, what would kill you is the level of carbon monoxide in your body, not the THC!

Marijuana is becoming stronger and more potent

Increase in potency is occurring, but this is largely due to prohibition. While the statement may be true, it can be misleading. Since access to marijuana is risky and limited, both consumers and producers are incentivized to use or sell higher potency material. The same trend was seen during alcohol prohibition. When access is regulated and controlled, there are a wider variety of available potencies. 

Marijuana is correlated with crime and aggression

There is absolutely no link to marijuana and crime or aggression. Scholars and government commissions for the most part agree that marijuana in no way causes crime. Almost all human and animal studies show that marijuana decreases rather than increases aggression. Moreover, those who were drunk showed far more aggression that those were were high.

Marijuana makes you an unsafe driver

Studies have shown that people who smoke marijuana have less motor vehicle accidents compared to those who drink alcohol. It has even been suggested that it makes people more cautious and attentive drivers. Accident studies have found that drivers who test positive for THC often show no signs of impairment, and in some instances even may drive more safely. 

References

• http://norml.org/aboutmarijuana/item/good-plant?category_id=730
• http://norml.org/aboutmarijuana/item/violent-acts?category_id=730
• http://www.drugpolicy.org/drug-facts/10-facts-about-marijuana
• http://www.weather.com/health/shocking-things-you-dont-know-about-weed-20140407?pageno=1
• http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-medical-marijuana/2013/10/5-amazing-things-you-didnt-know-about-marijuana/
• http://www.theweedblog.com/42-0-facts-about-marijuana-and-why-it-should-be-legal/
• http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana

Chapter Four: Critical Analysis of Scientific Article (I)

Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannibinol Inhibits Epithelial Growth-Factor-Induced Lung Cancer Cell Migration in Vitro as Well as Its Growth and Metastasis in Vivo

This post will introduce you to the first of two anyleses on research articles that focus on specific types of cancer. The first article introduces the topic of THC in the treatment of lung cancer. It will be broken down to better dissect the research article. 

Main Research Question

• Effects of THC on the EGF-induced growth and metastasis on human cell lung cancer in vitro (meaning in the laboratory)
• Effects of THC on tumor growth and lung metastasis in vivo (meaning inside an organism) 

Methods

• Western Blot and Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR)
• Examined expression of cannabinoid receptor in human NSCLC (Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer) cell lines
• Cell Line #1 - A549
• Cell Line #2 - SW-1573
• Examined expression of EGFR (Epithelial Growth Factor Receptor) in human NSCLC cell lines
• Treatment with THC (In Vitro)
• Examined effect of THC on cell migration/motility (EGF and EGFR play important roles in cell migration)
• Percent colonization of the wound areas in cancer cell lines compared to vehicle-treated EGF-stimulated wounds (scratch wound assay)
• Tryptan Blue Staining
• Examined cell viability
• Treatment with THC (In Vivo)
• Intravenous injection through lateral tail vein of SCID (severe combined immunodeficient) mice
• Injection of THC (or vehicle) peritumorally daily for 21 says
• Mice Tumor Sample Analysis
• Analyzed cell proliferation, vascularization, and phosphorylation of signaling molecules FAK, ERK1, ERK2, and AKT

Results

• Western Blot and RT-PCR
• Expressed CB1 and CB2 receptors
• Treatment with THC (In Vitro)
• THC induced cell rounding which led to failure of the cell to produce characteristic protrusions
• No effect on viability of cells
• Induce apoptosis and inhibit proliferation
• Decreased EGF-stimulated cell migration
• Inhibited EGF-induced transwall migration in a dose-dependent manner
• No effect on EGFR expression or phosphorylation
• Enhanced EGF-induced phosphorylation of FAK at tyrosine 397 and inhibition of AKT phosphorylation
• Inhibited EGF-induced invasion in dose-dependent manner 
• Tryptan Blue Staining
• Concentration of THC did not have any significant effect on viability of cell lines
• Treatment with THC (In Vivo)
• Surface lung metastases were significantly reduced
• Significantly reduced tumor weight and number lesions
• Tumor growth in THC-treated animals was inhibited compared to that in vehicle-treated animals
• No significant alterations in physiological parameters like body or liver weight were observed
• Mice Tumor Sample Analysis
• Inhibit in vivo tumor cell proliferation and vascularization determined by Ki67 and CD31 immunostaining
• Phosphorylation of FAK, ERK 1, ERK 2, and AKT were reduced in THC-treated tumors 

Analysis of Results (Discussion)

• Comparison to Previous Literature
• Previous studies demonstrated tumor-promoting or antineoplastic effects of THC, but no research is on the effect of EGFR-mediated growth and motility of lung cancer
• Expression of CB2 receptors in A549 cells was questioned, but this study confirmed CB1 and CB2 expression on both A549 and SW-1573
• THC treatment attenuated EGF-induced morphological changes like cell elongation and generation of protrusions leading to rounding and reduction of mobility
• Antimigratory effect of THC was previously found
• Advancement in Scientific Knowledge
• EGFR-mediated activation of MAP kinases has reported to regulate EGF-induced cell migration and invasion – this study observed a reduction in EGF-induced ERK1/2 and JNK1/2 phosphorylation
• Other studies have reported THC-induced activation of AKT/PKB – this study found that THC reduced AKT phosphorylation induced by EGF
• THC exhibits equal affinity toward CB1 and CB2
• The high case:fatality ratio observed in lung cancer is attributed to a poor response to therapy and the aggressive biological nature of the disease
• High expression of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) is common in non-small cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) and correlates to a more aggressive disease, resistance to chemotherapy, and poor prognosis
• Additional Questions
• Molecular mechanism involved in THC-mediated inhibition of chemotaxis induced by EGF are not well characterized
• Modulation of EGFR expression with THC
• Function of FAK, ERK 1/2, and AKT in tumors

Molecular Biology Techniques Used in Experiment

• Western Blot: analytical technique that detects specific proteins in a sample that is extracted from a tissue sample. Using gel electrophoresis, the proteins in the sample are separated by molecular weight using a current that passes through the gel, which pulls smaller proteins further down the gel and leaves larger proteins closer to the top of the gel (wells)
• Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR): method of amplifying copies of a gene on DNA. Typically it involves denaturing of the DNA strand (using heat to separate the strands) followed by the annealing (binding) of a primer that is complimentary to a region of the nucleotide strand, and lastly the the elongation of the strand via DNA polymerase (enzyme that adds nucleotides to already-existing nucleotide strand
• Tryptan Blue Staining: visualization technique that selectively dyes dead tissues or cell the color blue, usually used to assess the tissue viability

The entire article (with images!) can be found here:

http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1038/sj.onc.1210641

References

Preet, A., Ganju, R., & Groopman, J. (2007) Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits epithelial growth factor-induced lung cancer cell mgiration in vitro as well as its growth and metastasis in vivo. Oncogene. 27(3): 339-46.

Chapter Three: Parents Smoking Marijuana? Ludicrous! Or Perhaps Not.

Pot and Parenting: Confession of Colorado's Weed-Smoking Moms

When one thinks about a marijuana-user, what comes to mind more often than not are adolescents and young adults with red eyes and a goofy smile on their face. The stereotype of a lazy, distracted, clumsy, tie-dye wearing, munchies-seeking slacker seems to be the consensus amongst those who don't use marijuana. Sometimes, one thinks of hippie, or perhaps other times it is associated with hip-hop culture or rasta culture.



Someone you don't think about when you hear the word "stoner" or "pothead"? Your mother.

















However, this may not be the case anymore. The recent legalization of both medical and recreational marijuana in Colorado is indicative of the changing tides on public perception. ABC recently covered a story on women who report using marijuana while being a parent.

Jane West, a mother of two, lives in Denver, Colorado, where recreational marijuana is legal. Instead of finishing a day off with a glass of wine, Jane and her friends choose to partake in the smoking of a joint. She believes that smoking marijuana should be made as socially acceptable as having a glass of wine and is unapologetic about getting high. However, she doesn't believe her kids should see her smoke, and she makes sure to keep weed locked away somewhere out of their reach. Jane also makes it a point to not be high in front of her kids.

As can be expected, the issue of parents smoking marijuana is causing an ethical, and sometimes legal, debate. The question arises as to whether or not one can be a good parent and get high. Accompanied with marijuana-use, and especially when it involves a parent, is the inevitable judgement and backlash from parents and marijuana users alike. Some critics believe parents who smoke pot are putting their kids at risk, and their kids can even be taken away if they are believed to be irresponsible pot smokers. The Denver Department of Human Services told ABC news that a parent's marijuana use is treated no differently than use of other substances, such as alcohol or prescription medication.



Jane and her friends argue that it comes down to tolerance and knowing how much an individual can handle. Similar to alcohol and other substances, it depends on the extent to which it is used. Excessive smoking, like drinking, can be harmful, but moderation can lead to beneficial outcomes. Marijuana carries with it a heavy stigma that is only perpetuated more negatively in the parent community.

Critique of Mainstream Media Article

In some ways, I think this article is great. In others, not so much. Reading about parents smoking marijuana was somewhat of an eye-opener for me, and I was interested to learn more about it since just the the title alone makes me think of the ethical and moral dilemma it implies. 

This article serves many purposes. For one, it sheds light on the truth about the population of marijuana users. Stereotypes once associated with "stoners" and "potheads" are dramatically shifting to include the wide demographic. 40% of Americans report trying marijuana at least once, and 20% report using it regularly. Originally, marijuana was associated with ethnic minorities, criminals, and those with deviant behaviors, and has progressed to be indicative of hippie culture or rasta culture, and later of hip-hop culture. As time goes on, the population of users dramatically changes, and it seems to me that now more than ever it is reaching all ages and genders from all walks of life. Further, it sheds light on the increasing leniency on the use of marijuana. I do believe that some regulatory actions, like the removal of kids in parents who excessively smoke marijuana to the point where adequate level of parenting isn't met, are appropriate in the designated scenarios. 

In some respects, the arguments made within the article go against themselves. For example, while Jane believes that smoking marijuana should be socially acceptable, she makes sure that her kids are nowhere near weed and she makes sure that she is not high around her kids. This is most likely due to the fact that they are young, but in a sense it weakens her main argument; the heavy stigma associated with marijuana rises from prior teachings and social standards. Moreover, she mentions that smoking marijuana should be as acceptable as a parent drinking, but it really doesn't make a strong case for her point to compare smoking to drinking, which in and of itself brings so many different negative connotations and moral and ethical issues. I believe she is in the right in preventing her kids from smoking or seeing her smoke, but she should educate them properly and not hide it as if it was something bad. The key is proper knowledge based with evidence. 

This article opened my eyes to the wider range of marijuana-users than I once thought possible, and highlights the giant strides made in public perception. However, more education based on scientific evidence is needed to truly diminish the stigma and negative connotation associated with marijuana and its users. This article served the purpose of shedding light on a very real topic, but did so in a way that presented a weak case and honestly didn't help "the movement" anymore than it did before.

References

• http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/pot-parenting-confessions-colorados-weed-smoking-moms/story?id=25705177&singlePage=true

Image Sources

• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2343868/The-Marijuana-Moms-Beverly-Hills-say-taking-drugs-makes-better-parents.html
• http://cannabisdestiny.com/5-stoner-stereotypes/

Chapter Two: Good vs Evil (A Changing Perspective)

In order to understand the debate on the legalization of marijuana and its use in medicine, it is crucial to take into perspective the ever-changing perceptions of marijuana use in context of the social constructs in different time periods. Educating oneself on a topic that one is unfamiliar with is the best way to find the hard facts and shed light on falsifications, a quality that is critical in analyzing the moral, ethical, and scientific dilemmas presented by marijuana use. To better grasp and comprehend how the views and public opinion on marijuana use and its users has evolved, we will go back in time and chronologically map out the development of marijuana as a therapeutic agent. Along the way, we will discover how the public opinion often goes back and forth between being pro-marijuana or anti-marijuana.

Let's start our trip back in time by analyzing the first major change in public views at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the medical marijuana movement. 

The Turn of the 20th Century: A Dramatic Shift in Public Perception

[1800] Upon arriving in the Antebellum era in America, we have to ask ourselves: how is marijuana used during this time period?

• Throughout the 19th century, drugs that are now considered illicit such as marijuana, cocaine, and opiates were once sold openly and at large to the public as painkillers
• Support for medical marijuana existed, but scientific empirical evidence was scarce

• Recreationally, marijuana did not have a large number of users in comparison to cocaine and opiate users

[Late 1800s and Early 1900s] Marijuana use was accepted for its therapeutic value by the public, right? Why then did public opinion change at the end of the 19th century?

• The public had various concerns on marijuana use, but most of the concerns were about the regulation of marijuana cultivation and possession
• Abuse of marijuana
• Ease of access to marijuana
• Rise in marijuana import
• More widespread drug addiction
• Shifting population of users (youth)
• Pressure from international treaty obligations

• Beginning in the late 19th century and early 20th century, lobbyists for drug control legislations created laws in attempt to regulate cultivation and possession - however, various loopholes existed and the laws were sporadically enforced
• The legislations of the time ultimately led the public to question whether the federal government would actually exert regulatory authority because it had failed to efficiently regulate marijuana use

[1930s-1960s] Why were regulatory authorities unable to meet the public demand for marijuana regulation? If regulatory authorities were not effective in controlling marijuana cultivation and possession, what occurred at the beginning of the 20th century that led to stricter and more enforced drug control legislation to pass? Welcome to the Anslinger Era. 

• Previously, legislations aimed to regulate marijuana by discussing public health concerns on the use of marijuana 
• It was difficult to find support for regulation however since medicinal uses were largely accepted by the public
• In 1892, Harry Anslinger, the spearhead of the opponents campaign at the beginning of the 20th century, became the commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics 
• Realizing that previous laws were ineffective since opponents used a public health approach, Anslinger revolutionized marijuana regulation by focusing on a criminal justice paradigm 

• Anslinger created the first effective regulatory legislation on marijuana use through the Marihuana Tax Act

• Although he wanted prohibition to be federally regulated, the federal government was reluctant to impose regulations because it raised the question as to whether or not prohibition is unconstitutional 
• By imposing a tax on the possession of marijuana as well as making the possession and cultivation of marijuana illegal, they were able to avert the question of constitutionality while still effectively prohibiting use of marijuana 
• Framing the act as a revenue measure (despite it not producing any revenue) effectively shielded the true intention of the tax act, which was to prohibit marijuana use
• The law-enforcement oriented approach was based on the idea that addicts should be handled with punishment and criminally rather than with treatment and rehabilitation 
• Once Anslinger became commissioner, marijuana was removed from the United States Pharmacopeia 
• This effectively ended the use of marijuana as medical treatment and eliminated the research opportunities
• Removal from the pharmacopeia meant that marijuana was not recognized for its pharmacological properties

Another question arises when analyzing the Anslinger Era; what tactics did the the opponents use to gain support? What were the factors used to justify drug control policy and marijuana regulation?

• The campaign against marijuana use, cultivation, and possession used a biased approach to sway the views of the public 

• The first claim made by Anslinger was that marijuana made black men have sex with white women (given the racial social constructs of this time, it should be quite clear why this claim was so appalling to social leaders) 
• Opponents portrayed the population of users as deviant from American society and therefore a threat to mainstream norms and values
• The stereotype classified users of marijuana as ethnic minorities that promoted insanity, crime, and violence
• Anslinger often told biased stories of insanity, murder, addiction, and the crimes and violent acts people under the influence of marijuana had committed 
• The hearings were given to audiences that knew very little about marijuana and its effects
• This allowed for Anslinger to more efficiently influence the public belief to support the idea that there is a link between marijuana use and unpopular behaviors 
• Particular scrutiny was given to women who used marijuana
• Usage in woman was believed to be a violation of gender roles and a threat to modernity, capitalism, society, biological reproduction, and even civilization
• The US needed to fulfill international pledges and had to take the legal and moral lead in an international drug control effort
• Passing of the first domestic anti-drug legislation allowed them to fulfill this requirement

The End of the 20th Century: Wavering Public Perception

[1960s-1990s] If marijuana use was under strict regulation and was effectively prohibited with support from the majority of the population, were there any supporters of the medicinal use of marijuana? Say hello to the medical marijuana movement.

• Opposition was virtually nonexistent, and any opposition that did emerge quickly failed
• Advocates faced many difficulties in gathering support and any protest was more often than not ineffective, impermanent, and unnoticed 
• Public Advocates
• Dr Walker Treadway - Public Health Representative
• Raised concern on the accuracy of the claims on the effect of marijuana that was made by Anslinger and his campaign
• John Coffee - Congressman 
• Publicly opposed drug policy and condemned the punitive approach to drug policy and denial of treatments to drug addicts
• Fiorella LaGuardia - Mayor of NYC
• Presented findings that found no link between marijuana and crime, aggressive or antisocial behavior, or personality change 

If the attempts to make regulatory legislations were ineffective, impermanent, and unnoticed, then there is no way that the medical marijuana movement was able to make a difference, right? Wrong! Say goodbye to the Anslinger era.

• With the retirement of the commissioner of the FBN in 1962, the Anslinger era ended and marked a new age in which the public view of marijuana once again shifted 
• Mental health professionals gained a voice in the policy debate over the use and possession of marijuana
• Goal was to redefine drug abuse as a disease that required health measures rather than law-enforcement measures 
• The idea that addiction should be treated as a disease rather than a crime gained credibility
• Law-enforcement based approach to marijuana use declined as a result
• During the 1960s, marijuana became associated with antiwar and antiauthority sentiment and even became glorified through the movies and music
• It became a symbol for the quest to find pleasure and self-enlightenment

So did the medical marijuana movement succeed in eliminating the regulation on marijuana use? Not quite, there was still some work to be done. 

• Marijuana use still wasn't legal but advocates had more opportunity to be heard than before
• Physicians, psychiatrists, and other public health officials were allowed to participate and greatly influenced the way the hearing went 
• More focus was given to research, education, rehabilitation, and social frame working
• Goal during this time period was to not only eliminate supply, but also the demand as well
• Presidential influence during this abandoned exclusive law-enforcement approach and increased budget for treatment, prevention, and research
• Creation of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act in 1970 brought all anti-drug legislations under one statute
• Changed the framework so that instead of the drug control policy being considered a revenue measure, it was included in the interstate commerce clause to more rightfully justify narcotic regulation
• Created a five-schedule system designed to classify drugs based on potential for abuse and accepted medical use
• Placed marijuana under "Schedule 1", meaning that it was not accepted for medical use and had high potential for abuse
• CDAPCA abandoned mandatory minimum sentence and reduced possession from a felony to a misdemeanor

Let me get this straight, the end of the 1970s marked a time where public perception regressed back to the mindset during the Anslinger era? Sort of! Public opinion went back and forth for some time between 1980-1990 (and still does to this day).

• Drug abuse was still considered to be the number one problem due to growing conservatism on social and moral issues
• Renationalization of drug control policy that emphasized law-enforcement and punishment served as a major drawback for proponents of medical marijuana
• A change in framework and institutional venues in 1990 served as a great success for the medical marijuana movement 
• Success could be attributed to ballot box and strategic framing of policy that shaped preferences and changed minds (activated public support and made it electorally relevant)
• Polls indicated that there was strong public support for the therapeutic use of medical marijuana 
• This shifted attention from legalization of marijuana to more sympathetic themes such as patient rights, medical autonomy, treatment options, and compassion
• Goal of proponents was to redefine marijuana as therapeutic rather than a drug associated with crime and violence
• Avoided issues of recreational use and instead encouraged public to make a distinction between recreational and medical use of marijuana

The 21st Century: Contemporary Views on Marijuana

Flash forward to present day and we find ourselves immersed in a country where marijuana is legalized in 2 states and approved for medical use in 21 states. As the leading illicit recreational drug, marijuana is now more than ever of direct importance to our generation and generations to come. 

Here are some key things to know about marijuana in todays day and age:

• It is the 3rd most popular recreational drug (1st elicit recreational drug) in America
• Alcohol and tobacco claim the #1 and #2 spots respectively 
• It is used by nearly 100 million Americans 
• 42% of US population has tried marijuana at least once
• Marijuana is far less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco
• 50,000 people die each year from alcohol poisoning
• 400,000 people die each year from tobacco smoking
• No one has ever died from or overdosed on marijuana
• Enforcing marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers $12 billion annually
• Most comes from arrest of over 740,000 individuals (more than total number of arrestees for murder, rape, robbery, and assault)
• Legalizing marijuana would generate $8.6 billion in federal and state tax revenue per year
• Since the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in Colorado, it has stimulated their economy by $2 million

And here's a fun fact:

• George Washington grew marijuana in his farm!

With increasing evidence to support therapeutic value of marijuana and more lenient legislations, marijuana is now at the brink of becoming legalized nationwide both recreationally and medically. However, let's not forgot the past! If there is one thing you should remember from our travel back in time, it's this: public perception changes over time according to the social constructs and zeitgeist (leading intellectual schools of thought) of that time period. The driving force behind changing perspectives? Empirical scientific evidence!

References

1. Ferraiolo, Kathleen, "From Killer Weed to Popular Medicine: The Evolution of American Drug Control, 1937 - 2000," Journal of Policy History 19 (2007): 147-179, accessed September 9^th, 2010.
2. http://norml.org/marijuana

Image Sources

1. http://thearrowsoftruth.com/fact-cannabis-kills-cancer/
2. http://www.marijuanamarihuana.biz/news/2013/08/dr-oshaughnessy-cannabis-was-medicine-before-prohibition/index.html
3. http://www.peachridgeglass.com/2013/02/cannibis-bottlemarijuana-tax-act-1937/
4. http://www.theweedblog.com/marijuana-history-harry-anslingers-gore-file/
5. http://www.tokesignals.com/worth-repeating-marijuana-laws-stuck-on-stupid-for-76-years/
6. http://www.pinterest.com/meg2dance/highh-love/
7. http://www.alternet.org/21st-century-paperwork-marks-new-era-ancient-medicine